Re: [google-appengine] Re: Plans for Node.js on App Engine Standard?

2017-07-19 Thread Martin Asquino
Hate to necro this thread but.. is this still the case today? And more importantly is there any reason for nodejs not being supported in standard environments? I'm not saying that *time* or *better things to do* are not good enough reasons, but I mean like any technical reason for it not to be

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Plans for Node.js on App Engine Standard?

2017-03-27 Thread Attila-Mihaly Balazs
Yes, that's exactly right Jeff. Thank you for formulating it clearly! Attila -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Plans for Node.js on App Engine Standard?

2017-03-27 Thread Jeff Schnitzer
You can only transactionally enqueue tasks from GAE standard using the ApiProxy-based interface. You cannot yet transactionally enqueue tasks (named or otherwise) with the new REST-based APIs for the datastore and task queue. Flex only supports the REST APIs. It’s great to hear that this is on

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Plans for Node.js on App Engine Standard?

2017-03-27 Thread Attila-Mihaly Balazs
Thank you. Also, to give task queues their due: they DO support transactional adding of tasks, just NOT for named tasks. Attila -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Plans for Node.js on App Engine Standard?

2017-03-27 Thread 'Jordan (Cloud Platform Support)' via Google App Engine
Transactional Tasks are coming to the new Cloud Tasks API which will be accessible via App Engine Flex and other Google Cloud products. You can sign up for the Alpha release

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Plans for Node.js on App Engine Standard?

2017-03-27 Thread Attila-Mihaly Balazs
Note that there is an (undocumented AFAIK) restriction that you can't transactionally enqueue *named* tasks :-( Attila -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Plans for Node.js on App Engine Standard?

2017-03-26 Thread Jeff Schnitzer
Me too! I don’t understand how anyone can use the task queue without it. I’m spinning up a postgres-based project that needs to use the task queue. Looks like I’m going to have to write tasks into a table then have a separate reaper process that shuttles them into the task queue. Sure wish I had

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Plans for Node.js on App Engine Standard?

2017-03-26 Thread Jason Collins
"ability to transactionally enqueue tasks" <-- probably my favourite feature. On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 at 11:06 Jeff Schnitzer wrote: > On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Jason Collins > wrote: > > "Not only for some of the API's that are unique to

Re: [google-appengine] Re: Plans for Node.js on App Engine Standard?

2017-03-25 Thread Jeff Schnitzer
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Jason Collins wrote: > "Not only for some of the API's that are unique to standard" > > Wilfred, which APIs specifically? > The most notable are the Task Queue API (with the ability to transactionally enqueue tasks) and the Search API.

[google-appengine] Re: Plans for Node.js on App Engine Standard?

2017-03-25 Thread Jason Collins
"Not only for some of the API's that are unique to standard" Wilfred, which APIs specifically? On Tuesday, 21 March 2017 06:10:45 UTC-7, Wilfred van der Deijl wrote: > > Hi, > > Does anyone know if there are any plans for Node.js on App Engine > Standard? I do see some notes (and alpha request

[google-appengine] Re: Plans for Node.js on App Engine Standard?

2017-03-23 Thread 'Jordan (Cloud Platform Support)' via Google App Engine
There are currently no plans for Node.js on App Engine Standard that I am aware of. I highly recommend you file this feature request on the Issue Tracker, as it will be properly routed to the engineering team there. Note that